Odors, words and objects
Abstract
The paper focuses on concepts and words referring to odors and to objects that have an odor. We argue that odors are an interesting object of study since they are evanescent, and since odor words do not refer to concrete and manipulable objects, but to scents evoked by objects. A second reason why odors are interesting is that some languages, as the Western ones, lack a specific odor lexicon, comparable in richness and variety to the color lexicon, and that performance on odors naming is typically worse than performance in color naming. In this work we discuss three main issues. First, we illustrate literature showing that, even if odor words do not have concrete referents, many languages encode them quite easily: the case of odors suggests that word meaning cannot be exhausted by the relationship with a referent, and highlights the importance of the social sharing of meaning. Second, we have discussed the peculiar status of odor concepts and words. Given their ambiguous status, their simple existence poses problems both to theories according to which concrete and abstract concepts do not differ, and to theories according to which they represent a dichotomy. Finally, we present an experiment in which we show that names of objects evoke their smell, and that these smells evoke approach and avoidance movements, in line with theories according to which words are grounded in both sensorial and motor systems.Riferimenti bibliografici
ANDREWS, M., FRANK, S., VIGLIOCCO, G. (2014), “Reconciling embodied and distributional accounts of meaning in language”, in Topics in cognitive science, 6(3), pp. 359-370.
BARSALOU, L. W. (2008), “Grounded cognition”, in Annu. Rev. Psychol., 59, pp. 617-645.
BORGHI, A.M., BINKOFSKI, F. (2014), Words As social Tools: An embodied view on abstract concepts, Springer, New York.
BORGHI, A.M., BONFIGLIOLI, C., LUGLI, L., RICCIARDELLI, P., RUBICHI, S., NICOLETTI, R. (2007), “Are visual stimuli sufficient to evoke motor information? Studies with hand primes”, in Neuroscience Letters, 411, pp. 17-21.
BORGHI, A.M., CARUANA, F. (2015), “Embodiment Theory”, in James D. Wright (editor-in-chief), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Vol 7. Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 420-426.
BORGHI, A.M., CIMATTI, F. (2009), “Words as tools and the problem of abstract words meanings”, in TAATGEN, N. & VAN RIJN, H. (eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Cognitive Science Society, Amsterdam, pp. 2304-2309.
BORGHI, A. M., FLUMINI, A., CIMATTI, F., MAROCCO, D., SCOROLLI, C. (2011), “Manipulating objects and telling words: a study on concrete and abstract words acquisition”, in Embodied and Grounded Cognition, 173, pp. 1-14.
BORGHI, A. M., FLUMINI, A., NATRAJ, N., WHEATON, L. A. (2012), “One hand, two objects: Emergence of affordance in contexts”, in Brain and cognition, 80(1), pp. 64-73.
BORGHI, A. M., SCOROLLI, C., CALIGIORE, D., BALDASSARRE, G., TUMMOLINI, L. (2013), “The embodied mind extended: using words as social tools”, in Frontiers in psychology, 4, pp. 1-10.
BURENHULT, N., MAJID, A. (2011), “Olfaction in Aslian ideology and language”, The Senses and Society, 6(1), pp. 19-29.
CAIN, W. S. (1979), “To know with the nose: keys to odor identification”, in Science, 203(4379), pp. 467-470.
CHEN, M., BARGH, J. A. (1999), “Consequences of automatic evaluation: Immediate behavioral predispositions to approach or avoid the stimulus”, in Personality and social psychology bulletin, 25(2), pp. 215-224.
CROCKER, E. (1935), “Seeking a Working Language for Odors and Flavors”, in Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, 27(10), pp.1225-1228.
CRUTCH, S., WARRINGTON, E. (2005), “Abstract and concrete concepts have structurally different representational frameworks”, in Brain, vol. 128(3), pp. 615-627.
DOVE, G. (2014), “Thinking in Words: Language as an Embodied Medium of Thought”, in Topics in Cognitive Science, vol. 6, pp. 371-389.
ENGEN, E., ENGEN, T. (1997), “Relationship between development of odor perception and language”, in Enfance, vol. 50(1), pp. 125-140.
ENGEN, T., ROSS, B. M. (1973), “Long-term memory of odors with and without verbal descriptions”, in Journal of Experimental Psychology, 100(2), 221.
FODOR, J. (1983), The modularity of mind, The MIT Press, Cambridge.
FLUMINI, A., BARCA, L., BORGHI, A. M., PEZZULO, G. (2014), “How do you hold your mouse? Tracking the compatibility effect between hand posture and stimulus size”, in Psychological research, pp. 1-11.
FREINA, L., BARONI, G., BORGHI, A.M., NICOLETTI, R. (2009), “Emotive Concept-Nouns and Motor Responses: Attraction or Repulsion?”, in Memory and Cognition, 37, pp. 493-499.
GALLESE, V. (2008), “Mirror neurons and the social nature of language: The neural exploitation hypothesis”, in Social neuroscience, 3(3-4), pp. 317-333.
GENTNER, D. (1982), “Why nouns are learned before verbs: Linguistic relativity versus natural partitioning”, in Center for the Study of Reading Technical Report, 257.
GHIO, M., VAGHI, M. M. S., TETTAMANTI, M. (2013), “Fine-grained semantic categorization across the abstract and concrete domains”, in PloS one, 8(6), e67090.
GLENBERG, A.M., ROBERTSON, D. A. (2000), “Symbol grounding and meaning: A comparison of high-dimensional and embodied theories of meaning”, in Journal of memory and language, 43(3), pp. 379-401.
GRANITO, C., SCOROLLI, C., BORGHI, A. M. (2015), “Naming a Lego World. The Role of Language in the Acquisition of Abstract Concepts”, in PloS one, 10(1), e0114615.
HOWES, D., CLASSEN, C. (2013). Ways of sensing: understanding the senses in society, Routledge.
LANDAUER, T. K., DUMAIS, S. T. (1997), “A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge”, in Psychological review, 104(2), pp. 211-240.
LEHRER, A. (1975), “Talking about wine”, in Language, vol. 51(4), pp. 901-923.
LEVINSON, S., MAJID, A. (2014), “Differential ineffability and the senses”, in Mind & Language, vol. 29, pp. 407-427.
LUPYAN, G., WARD, E. (2013), “Language can boost otherwise unseen objects into visual awareness”, in PNAS, vol. 110(35), pp. 14196-14201.
LUPYAN, G., CASASANTO, D. (2014), “Meaningless words promote meaningful categorization”, in Language and Cognition / FirstView Article, pp. 1-27.
MAJID, A. (2015), “Cultural factors shape olfactory language”, in Trends in cognitive sciences, 19(11), pp. 629-630.
MAJID, A., LEVINSON, S. (2011), “The Senses in Language and Culture”, in Senses & Society, vol. 6(1), pp. 5-18.
MAJID, A., BURENHULT, N. (2014), “Odors are expressible in language, as long as you speak the right language”, in Cognition, vol. 130(2), pp. 266-270.
OLOFSSON, J.K., GOTTFRIED, J.A. (2015), “The muted sense: neurocognitive limitations of olfactory language”, in Trends in Cognitive Science, 19, 314-321.
PECHER, D., BOOT, I., VAN DANTZIG, S. (2011), “Abstract concepts: sensorymotor grounding, metaphors, and beyond”, in ROSS, B. (Ed.). The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, vol. 54, pp. 217-248, Academic Press, Burlington.
RICHARDSON, J., ZUCCO, G. (1989), “Cognition and olfaction: A review”, in Psychological Bulletin, vol. 105(3), pp. 352-360.
SAKREIDA, K., SCOROLLI, C., MENZ, M. M., HEIM, S., BORGHI, A. M., BINKOFSKI, F. (2013), “Are abstract action words embodied? An fMRI investigation at the interface between language and motor cognition”, in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 7, http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00125.
SCOROLLI, C., BORGHI, A. (2007), “Sentence comprehension and action: Effector specific modulation of the motor system”, in Brain Research, vol. 1130, pp. 119-124.
TETTAMANTI, M., BUCCINO, G., SACCUMAN, M. C., GALLESE, V., DANNA, M., SCIFO, P., FERRUCCIO, F., RIZZOLATTI, G., CAPPA, S., PERANI, D. (2005), “Listening to Action-related Sentences Activates Fronto-parietal Motor Circuits”, in Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. 17(2), pp. 273-281.
YESHURUN, Y., SOBEL, N. (2010), “An odor is not worth a thousand words: from multidimensional odors to unidimensional odor objects”, in Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 61, pp. 219-41.
VAINIO, L., SYMES, E., ELLIS, R., TUCKER, M., OTTOBONI, G. (2008), “On the relations between action planning, object identification, and motor representations of observed actions and objects”, in Cognition, 108(2), pp. 444-465.
WANG, J., CONDER, J., BLITZER, D., SHINKAREVA, S. (2010), “Neural representation of abstract and concrete concepts: A meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies”, in Human Brain Mapping, vol. 31, pp. 1459-1468.
WIEMER-HASTINGS, K., KRUG, J., XU, X. (2001), “Imagery, context availability, contextual constraint, and abstractnessabstractness”, in Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference of the cognitive science society, pp. 1134-1139, Erlbaum Mahwah, NJ.
WILSON D., STEVENSON (2006), Learning to Smell. Olfactory Perception from Neurobiology to Behavior, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
WITTGENSTEIN, L. (1967), Zettel, Blackwell, Oxford.
WHORF, B. L. (2000a). The relation of habitual thought and behavior to language, in CARROLL, J. B. (Ed.), Language, thought and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 134-159. (Original work published 1939).
WHORF, B. L. (2000b). Science and linguistics, in CARROLL, J. B. (Ed.), Language, thought and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 207-219. (Original work published 1940).
WNUK, E., MAJID, A. (2014), “Revisiting the limits of language: The odor lexicon of Maniq”, in Cognition, vol. 131, pp. 125-138.
ZARZO, M., STANTON, D. T. (2009), “Understanding the underlying dimensions in perfumers’ odor perception space as a basis for developing meaningful odor maps”, in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(2), pp. 225-247.
Quest'opera è distribuita con Licenza Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
